W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > January 2011

Re: SWEET (but not friendly) ontologies

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 12:32:20 -0500
Message-ID: <4D39C324.1080701@openlinksw.com>
To: Raúl García Castro <rgarcia@fi.upm.es>
CC: public-lod@w3.org
On 1/21/11 12:25 PM, Raúl García Castro wrote:
> El 21/01/11 15:54, Kingsley Idehen escribió:
>> On 1/21/11 9:40 AM, Raúl García Castro wrote:
>>> Dear Bernard,
>>>
>>> In the SemsorGrid4Env European project [4] we are working with the
>>> SWEET v2.0 ontologies in order to reuse some general terms in our
>>> flood management use case.
>>>
>>> You are correct in saying that the documentation and metadata provided
>>> by these ontologies could be better. And this would also extend their
>>> use.
>>>
>>> You can take a look at the ontologies that we have developed at [5].
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>>
>>> [4] http://www.semsorgrid4env.eu/
>>> [5] http://www.semsorgrid4env.eu/index.php/ontologies
>>
>> Yes, but do you have any live accessible data? That's the crux of the
>> matter re. VOAF. Basically, is there publicly accessible Linked Data
>> based on this ontology from your project?
>
> Dear Kingsley,
>
> Right now we are working on publishing the data that we are managing 
> in the project as linked data; give us a couple of months. :)

Okay :-)


Kingsley
>
> Kind regards,
>
>>>> Hello all
>>>>
>>>> Gathering vocabularies for the growing VOAF dataset [1] leads to the
>>>> discovery of a bunch of linking and resusing good practice (good news)
>>>> but also makes obvious in comparison some data islands, apparently
>>>> isolated from everyything else whatsoever in the Cloud.
>>>>
>>>> The SWEET ontologies developed by NASA [2] [3] seem to be in that 
>>>> case.
>>>> We have there a set of about 200 interlinked ontologies for Earth and
>>>> Environment sciences, but neither relying on any external 
>>>> namespace, nor
>>>> bearing any kind of metadata (creator, date, publisher, rights ...) to
>>>> which we are used in "friendly" vocabularies. SWEET ontologies don't
>>>> seem used in any VOAF vocabulary or CKAN package I've met so far. And
>>>> the homepage has not even a contact email to cc this message :(
>>>>
>>>> I've heard that NASA uses those ontologies internally, but could not
>>>> find any pointer to that kind of use.
>>>>
>>>> This is really a sad observation given the size of the work and the
>>>> reliable organization backing up this effort, those ontologies 
>>>> should be
>>>> linked to and from many other vocabularies!
>>>>
>>>> So, if anyone has used one of SWEET vocabularies in a dataset or 
>>>> extend
>>>> it in some vocabulary, please send pointers!
>>>> And if someone behind SWEET ontologies is lurking on this list, I 
>>>> would
>>>> be happy to make contact :)
>>>>
>>>> Bernard
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://www.mondeca.com/foaf/voaf-vocabs.rdf
>>>> [2] http://sweet.jpl.nasa.gov/
>>>> [3] http://sweet.jpl.nasa.gov/2.1/
>


-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
President&  CEO
OpenLink Software
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
Received on Friday, 21 January 2011 17:32:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 31 March 2013 14:24:31 UTC